Jump to content

smallspy

CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Content Count

    9,956
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto, Ont.

Recent Profile Visitors

17,249 profile views
  1. Why? What if one of the types of buses operates in such a better manner than the others that it negates interoperability? Dan
  2. There is a lot of trackage that used to exist at Hillcrest that doesn't anymore. I can think of a couple of spots that would have filled this requirement, but the only three that I can think of that still exist are all in that photograph (well, part of the third is in that photograph). Most intersections allow a car to change direction in a three-point maneuver to turn back around. But that's not what is being discussed here. Specifically, the ability to make a three-point maneuver to turn the car around on the same piece of track as it came in on. As the vast majority of the trackage in Toronto is directional, there are very few places were this can be done. Dan
  3. Yes - they both use the SAE j1772 standard, as do all of the chargers at both of those divisions. Dan
  4. Again - that's a more recent event, isn't it? From 1966 to whenever the line opens, the B-D will have operated without any redundancy at all. You're missing the point entirely. Those 6 plus routes into downtown ARE the alternates. The whole idea is that someone living in say Westboro would be able to take the 85 to the 11 to get downtown, rather than taking the Confederation Line. Or take the 25 to the 12 if they are living in Blackburn. Again, there is no way that the capacity of a rapid transit system can ever be replaced by surface routes. But that's not what we're trying to achieve here. Church lasted 6 months after the opening of the Yonge Line. And the Bathurst, St. Clair and Harbord lines do absolutely nothing for people heading downtown, unless they live on those lines and then are using to to access another route. But that's the point. You use alternate routes to get to downtown if the subway is down. Again - not what we're going after here. But then you're trying to do exactly what you're suggesting they don't do - run a redundant service paralleling the rapid transit. It's a waste of money to do that. The route that exist are more-or-less effective for what needs to be done. (Yes, there are a couple of routes that maybe could stand to be realigned, but that's not the point of this exercise, and frankly there are people that are getting paid to study and determine those kinds of things.) What does need to be done is improve the frequencies on the routes as they already exist - although more than anything, that's just to improve the service on the street and get more people onto transit, and not necessary for any reasons pertaining to providing any redundancy. But you're not, though. Ottawa's network is reasonably well configured to offer alternates into downtown. Dan
  5. It's not my place or time to divulge or release info that isn't ready to be divulged or released. But there is definitely things progressing, and it's not certainly not due to a "lack of interest". There was also a crossover on Dufferin just north of King that served as the crossover track for Roncy - but that was gone by 2003 or so. Are you talking about streetcar, or including subway/SRT in this? Wyes are extremely rare on the rapid transit system, but there are a couple of places with which to make a single-tracked wying maneuver on the subway system. And there are no other locations on the streetcar system than those at Hillcrest. Dan
  6. That's correct - they were going to built a right of way down the middle of Lakeshore to Legion Road, with a new signalized intersection there. But the plans that I saw - preliminary as they may be - didn't seem to have any issues with continuing over the bridge there. Or perhaps the plan was to replace it outright, I honestly can't recall. It's quite funny to look back on many of the decisions taken, and see how the TTC continually ties itself in knots when coming to decisions that almost inevitably get changed. Well, funny from where I sit - I can appreciate that those people who are more likely be affected by it - such as yourself - would feel frustration at the constant changes in plans and yet lack of action of any substantial result. Dan
  7. But that's a relatively recent event in Toronto's history, however. When the Yonge Line opened in 1954, they rushed to pull the streetcar tracks out starting quite literally the day after the subway opened. And to this day, there isn't really any direct redundancy for the B-D line. All that said..... Building direct redundancy for a rapid transit line is a fool's errand. No surface transit can ever come close to meeting the required capacities. What makes far more sense - where possible, mind - is to build a network featuring lower-capacity, surface routes laid out in a rectilinear pattern, with some paralleling the rapid transit, and others crossing or meeting with it. This way, a majority of customers have alternate routes that they can take should there be any problems with a singular, or in a worst case multiple points on the rapid transit system. Dan
  8. Much of the planning for the new loop immediately west of Humber - be it at Legion Rd. or Park Lawn - has been part of the Waterfront West line. The loop west of Humber has only been in the plans in the past 20-ish years or so, whereas the various forms of the WWLRT date back to the early 1980s. From my recollections, the issue with Legion Rd. had nothing to do with any structures, but moreover as a tie-in with a relocated Mimico GO Station. And those plans ended in the 1990s - which made the choice of Legion Rd. a bit unnecessary, and resulting in the next location to be Park Lawn south of Lakeshore. It was cheap, and yet not so much either. It would have required the TTC to basically double the size of the existing loop - I don't know if talks with the Parks Department ever managed to get past the preliminary stage, but I do recall Parks having concerns about its location. Even the current location seems fluid. The developer of site wants the loop about where the GO tracks pass under the Gardiner, although the TTC would prefer them further west - to try and pick up as many people from the towers west of Park Lawn. It remains to be seen what the final result is. Dan
  9. Not necessarily. The reliability for any complex system such as this is usually graphically indicated with a bell curve. Initially reliability isn't great as they sort out all of the small little issues. As all of that gets sorted out, and as the staff learns the various component systems better, the reliability increases. Then, once the system ages and components start to wear out, the reliability starts to decrease again. Dan
  10. That's a good question, and while I have a lot of contacts within the TTC none of them are placed high enough to be able to make those kinds of decisions. One thing is for sure though - the TTC has certainly dragged its feet on a lot of the improvements that were supposed to be coming with the Flexities, and so it wouldn't surprise me if the delay in prepping Russell and Roncy was more accidental than purposely trying to stretch the budget. Hillcrest, not Hillside. Also, this whole idea of converting Hillcrest to a storage facility is pretty new - as in the past 12 or 18 or so months - and I'm not sure that it would have figured in to the 2019-version of the capital budget. To be honest though, $900mil seems way too high to convert an existing facility that the TTC already owns to build a new one, and sounds to me like part of that budget was also to purchase the land as well as construction. That said, the $85mil currently earmarked also seems awfully low. Maybe Hillcrest is now only intended to be very temporary until a new property can be found, purchased and built upon. All improvements necessary for Russell and Roncy to handle the Flexities are currently budgeted for and allocated. That's a good question. I haven't heard of any discussions occurring between the two - although that certainly doesn't mean that it isn't happening behind the scenes. Why? The building is still needed. There are lots of small types of repair and inspection that are perfectly capable of being done at Russell or Roncy, and that don't need to be done at Leslie. Park Lawn Loop has long been wanted by the TTC as a way to get more service out to the newer condos that have been built around Lakeshore Blvd and Park Lawn. At one point, it was designated to be a terminus for the Harbourfront West LRT, and more recently to extend the Queen cars that turn at Humber. And yes, building it will render Humber Loop largely obsolete. As above - to increase the amount of service to the newer-built condos around the intersection of Lakeshore and Park Lawn. And soon, to the neighbourhood to be built on the former Peek Freans lands. By running both the Queen and King cars - likely at similar, and thus interlaced headways - it allows people the choice of how to get downtown and minimize transfers at Roncesvalles. Dan
  11. Once all of the work at Russell and Roncy is completed, the total storage capacity of all three streetcar barns is about 264 cars - what the total fleet size would be should the next order be for 60 cars. The concern is that with ridership downtown going up higher than the system-wide increase that they are looking to buy 100 cars, not 60. Those extra 40 cars would need to be stored somewhere, and that's where the current nascent plan to convert part of Hillcrest to streetcar storage would come into play. Dan
  12. Ahh indeed, I'd totally forgotten about that plan. Dan
  13. That's exactly it. The Port Lands redevelopment itself is still 5 or more years from completion. And who knows when the Ontario Line will actually open. Both of these projects will have huge knock-on effects to the shape and direction that any improvements will take, to say nothing about potential changes in ridership patterns. But what other options are there, if not to forego the improvements? There's no point in putting BRT lanes on Eglinton, for instance, if the Crosstown isn't open in 2021. And it doesn't make sense to realign all of the routes that would connect with it if the route itself isn't ready. There's simply no way to improve service on the YUS until the ATO/ATC is installed up to Finch, as the plant south of the station is one of the major choke points. The lead times necessary for a lot of these things also make it impossible for the TTC to say, purchase 100 extra buses in case the opening of the Crosstown is delayed, because they're just about to miss the window for that. It sucks, but if the projects aren't ready, delaying the suite of improvements to go with them is really the only option. Dan
  14. The improvements that they are suggesting have more to do with the LRT being built in the area of Morningside and Lawrence, methinks. And once again.......for every complaint like this that exists, there aren't the rides to back it up. The TTC has routes that ran along Kingston out to Lawrence and beyond - and they always keep getting cut. Look up the 114, or the old 12C. Even the ridership on the current 12D isn't terrific. Why do you think that is? Dan
×
×
  • Create New...